If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

And Your notion of "fairness" is strange as You ignore that it was AMD team decision to make those defaults You find "unfair"...

It was about what Linux users can expect. And they most likely run on 3.9 or older kernels... Since no mainstream distro (mobile or not) use 3.10 yet. Such test would describe future for us.

Well, i do find it strange that a user concerned about performance wouldn't even bother setting the performance profile setting to high.

I know there are some issues with that on APUs, at least, (not sure about SI) - but it would likely help at least SOME... And it takes about 5 seconds to do, even on the 3.9 kernel. No recompiling or installing necessary.

But i agree this is a nice data point to have to compare against in future tests. It's just that those future tests are what will really be interesting, instead of this one.

As others have said, RadeonSI performance can be greatly improved either by selecting profile based power management and then setting /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile to high, or by using a 3.11 kernel. Interestingly, when using a 3.11 kernel it seems like it will not be necessary to enable the new "DPM" power mangement (by adding radeon.dpm=1 to the GRUB kernel boot options) to get good performance (although of course enabling DPM will reduce power consumption and lower heat output) - I have found the following patch in the 3.11 kernel: